Post on 22-Dec-2015
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 1
Review Reports: a Means to Collect
Experience and Feedback
Klaus Bothe
3rd Workshop Software Engineering Education and Reverse Engineering,
Ohrid, Macedonia, 2003
Institute of Informatics, Humboldt University – Berlin, Germany, bothe@informatik.hu-berlin.de
Joint Course on Software Engineering
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 2
The task of reviews
General technique to assess the state of software
Review: A process or meeting during which a work product ... is presented to project personnel, managers, users, customers, or other interested parties for comment or approval. Types include code review, design review, formal qualification review, requirements review, test readiness review (IEEE Std. 610.12-1990).
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 3
Reviews in our project
Review: A process or meeting during which a work product ... is
presented to project personnel, managers, users, customers, or
other interested parties for comment or approval. Types include
code review, design review, formal qualification review,
requirements review, test readiness review (IEEE Std. 610.12-
1990).
Course materials
We
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 4
Participants Topics Syllabus
Schedule
Basic Principles
F.A.Q. Discussion
Case studies
Assignments
Literature
Slides(ppt, pdf)
Documents
Work product: course materials
Work product: all parts of the
course materials
Main part:5 Parts, 27 Topics, 1400 Slides
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 5
Review report form (1)
Review reportReview object: (e.g. topic03.ppt)Version: (e.g. Mar.23,2003)Reviewer(s): (e.g. K. Zdravkova)Date: (e.g. May.23,2003)
1. General remarks and general impression concerning the state of the review object (e. g. too many textual slides - should be replaced by figures)
2. Contents errors and misspellings in the slides (e.g. wrong contents)
3. Physical errors in the slides (e.g. the order of animated parts)
4. Slides with a bad style and suggestions for improvements(e.g. too much contents, too textual)
Review reportReview object: (e.g. topic03.ppt)Version: (e.g. Mar.23,2003)Reviewer(s): (e.g. K. Zdravkova)Date: (e.g. May.23,2003)
1. General remarks and general impression concerning the state of the review object (e. g. too many textual slides - should be replaced by figures)
2. Contents errors and misspellings in the slides (e.g. wrong contents)
3. Physical errors in the slides (e.g. the order of animated parts)
4. Slides with a bad style and suggestions for improvements(e.g. too much contents, too textual)
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 6
Review report form (2)
5. Deviations from the style guides (e.g. slide 3: question to students not in a cloud)
6. Additional suggestions for improvements and extentions of the review object
7. Lecture notes for particular slides: (e.g.slide3: LN adequate, missing, should be extended, too long)
8. Experience report from a lecture: - conveniences and inconveniences - involvement of students (by questions)
9. Experience with the translation into the native language
10. Suggestions to improve the review report form
5. Deviations from the style guides (e.g. slide 3: question to students not in a cloud)
6. Additional suggestions for improvements and extentions of the review object
7. Lecture notes for particular slides: (e.g.slide3: LN adequate, missing, should be extended, too long)
8. Experience report from a lecture: - conveniences and inconveniences - involvement of students (by questions)
9. Experience with the translation into the native language
10. Suggestions to improve the review report form
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 7
Review object: a topic of a certain version as a whole (topic = semantic
unit)
1. General impresssion of the whole topic
6. Suggestions for improvements
New slides (ppt)
+
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 8
Review of single slides
2DAAD project „Joint Course on Software Engineering“ ©
Analysisand
Definition
Analysisand
Definition
The classical waterfall model (1970)
DesignDesign
ImplementationImplementation
TestTest
Usage and Maintenance
Usage and Maintenance
Problems ?
2. Contents errors (including misspellings)?
3. Physical errors (animation, place of slide elements)?
4. General assessment of the slide style
5. Deviations from the style guides?
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 9
Review of the lecture notes 1
Topic 3: Lecture Notes (instructions for the lecturer) Author of the topic: …English version: ...Author of the lecture notes: … About the subject of this topic: … To do: … Slides that could be improved and replaced: … Duration of the lecture: … History of changes: …
2 Contents: … Methodology: … Remarks: … Answer to the question ‚Problems?‘: …
Humboldt University Berlin, University of Novi Sad, University of Plovdiv,University of Skopje, University of Belgrade, University of Niš, University of Kragujevac
DAAD Project“Joint Course on Software Engineering”
Version: Apr. 16, 2003 (D Apr. 16, 2003)
Topic 3Software process models
2DAAD project „Joint Course on Software Engineering“ ©
Analysisand
Definition
Analysisand
Definition
The classical waterfall model (1970)
DesignDesign
ImplementationImplementation
TestTest
Usage and Maintenance
Usage and Maintenance
Problems ?
7. Lecture notes:adequate, missing, too long ... ?
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 10
Review report form (1)
Review reportReview object: (e.g. topic03.ppt)Version: (e.g. Mar.23,2003)Reviewer(s): (e.g. K. Zdravkova)Date: (e.g. May.23,2003)
1. General remarks and general impression concerning the state of the review object (e. g. too many textual slides - should be replaced by figures)
2. Contents errors and misspellings in the slides (e.g. wrong contents)
3. Physical errors in the slides (e.g. the order of animated parts)
4. Slides with a bad style and suggestions for improvements(e.g. too much contents, too textual)
Review reportReview object: (e.g. topic03.ppt)Version: (e.g. Mar.23,2003)Reviewer(s): (e.g. K. Zdravkova)Date: (e.g. May.23,2003)
1. General remarks and general impression concerning the state of the review object (e. g. too many textual slides - should be replaced by figures)
2. Contents errors and misspellings in the slides (e.g. wrong contents)
3. Physical errors in the slides (e.g. the order of animated parts)
4. Slides with a bad style and suggestions for improvements(e.g. too much contents, too textual)
Points 2-5: contents of particular
slides
Point 1: the whole topic
Points 1-5: assess the current state of the document
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 11
Review report form (2)
5. Deviations from the style guides (e.g. slide 3: question to students not in a cloud)
6. Additional suggestions for improvements and extentions of the review object
7. Lecture notes for particular slides: (e.g.slide3: LN adequate, missing, should be extended, too long)
8. Experience report from a lecture: - conveniences and inconveniences - involvement of students (by questions)
9. Experience with the translation into the native language
10. Suggestions to improve the review report form
5. Deviations from the style guides (e.g. slide 3: question to students not in a cloud)
6. Additional suggestions for improvements and extentions of the review object
7. Lecture notes for particular slides: (e.g.slide3: LN adequate, missing, should be extended, too long)
8. Experience report from a lecture: - conveniences and inconveniences - involvement of students (by questions)
9. Experience with the translation into the native language
10. Suggestions to improve the review report form Metaquestion
Compare with document „Slide style
guides“
Are the instructions for
the lecturer adequate?
Translation to national
languages
Requirement: lecture has been
held
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 12
Review reports: the purpose in our project
^_^
original developer
^_^
translator^_^
lecture notes
provider
^_^^_^
modifiers
^_^^_^^_^
lecturers
^_^ ^_^ ^_^
students
Topic 5
Involved persons with an opinion to the lecture material
^_^ ^_^ ^_^
Review Reports: a means to Collect Experience and Feedback 13
Review reports: the purpose in our project
Main purposes:
1. Collect information on the current state of a review object from different persons
2. Draw conclusions:
• evaluate the review reports
• modify and extend the material
Discussion forum
Version management
Involved persons with an opinion to the lecture material
^_^
original developer^_^
translator^_^
lecture notes provider
^_^^_^
modifiers
^_^^_^^_^
lecturers
^_^ ^_^ ^_^
students
Topic 5
^_^ ^_^ ^_^